U.S. Supreme Court Considers Gay Marriage

Condemning a form of behavior based on religious beliefs does not give the condemner the right to stop someone from engaging in the condemned behavior.  

Oeps, is this twisting towards another freewill thread? 

Ambient Hurricanes wrote:   It says that He condemns their behavior.  There's a big difference.  God also condemns my own pride, lust, and selfishness, but I believe that I am forgiven because Jesus Christ died on my behalf.

But what is there to condemn about it if that's just the way the guy is?  Sorry, but to me, that sounds very regressive and it would have to be coming from a text written thousands of years back.    If one side can take shelter under religion to judge others in a very prejudiced way, the other side is entitled to take shelter under freedom of expression to pay right back in the same coin.   I cannot and will not accept religious belief as a sound reason to judge another person.   Religious belief is for the person himself to judge his own actions as to whether he has or hasn't incurred the wrath of his God, not impose on others and pooh pooh their choices.

AlexDOM wrote: [QUOTE=Ambient Hurricanes]Roger/Dark Elf: First of all, nowhere in Scripture does it say that God hates homosexuals.  It says that He condemns their behavior.  There's a big difference.  God also condemns my own pride, lust, and selfishness, but I believe that I am forgiven because Jesus Christ died on my behalf.  All those who believe, homosexual or heterosexual, will also be forgiven: "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."  TRUE DAT!!!

[QUOTE=Ambient Hurricanes]Roger/Dark Elf:

First of all, nowhere in Scripture does it say that God hates homosexuals.  It says that He condemns their behavior.  There's a big difference.  God also condemns my own pride, lust, and selfishness, but I believe that I am forgiven because Jesus Christ died on my behalf.  All those who believe, homosexual or heterosexual, will also be forgiven:
"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." 

Roger/Dark Elf:

First of all, nowhere in Scripture does it say that God hates homosexuals.  It says that He condemns their behavior.  There's a big difference.  God also condemns my own pride, lust, and selfishness, but I believe that I am forgiven because Jesus Christ died on my behalf.  All those who believe, homosexual or heterosexual, will also be forgiven:
"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." 

Secondly,

Dictionary wrote: Objective (adj): Having actual existence or reality.

Yes, I do know what the word means, I'm just using a different definition than the one you're thinking of.  I never said that everyone who makes a truth claim has an objective perspective.  I said that religious and moral truth claims are objective because they don't deal with subjective criteria that differ from person to person but with reality. 

The T wrote: That it might be legally accepted is much different to say that in other countries it will be culturally accepted. In some things, yes, specially commerce-related. In others, the rest of the world doesn't really pay much attention to US (or UK's, or Europe) laws.

*shrug* I stand corrected.

True

That it might be legally accepted is much different to say that in other countries it will be culturally accepted.

In some things, yes, specially commerce-related. In others, the rest of the world doesn't really pay much attention to US (or UK's, or Europe) laws.

Atavachron wrote: you mean slow relative to its constitution and Bill of Rights

Probably. I was referring to emancipation and descrimination in general. I guess a specific example would be the 100 years between the Emancipation Proclamation and the Voting Rights Act.